Many of the Americans that travelled to the Middle East as journalists and were known for their hawkish bent, or were sent to the region assigned to fight the Judeo-American wars that never end—returned to America impressed by a regional thinking which says that people prefer to stand with a strong horse.
And so, the career journalists as well as the now-discharged
soldiers of the American military who were given the opportunity to air their
views in public, repeatedly lauded that Mideastern saying in the conversations
they had. What they did after that was build on the thought in such manner as
to reinforce their long held hawkish views.
In so doing, however, these people relied heavily on the
Jewish method of advancing a cause. That is, they neglected to adopt a long
term strategy in favor of hopscotching over tactical responses when tackling
the momentary events they thought would be useful to them.
This approach also led those people to believe that they
could use the Ronald Reagan stance which he developed around the need to revamp
the American military. The philosophy employed there came down to saying that
you can preserve the peace only by building the strength that will deter the
enemy from provoking or attacking you.
When all these ideas come together in the mind of an
individual whose self-esteem has not yet developed to a high enough level, they
produce a character such as Tom Cotton who believes that no American has
existed or will ever exist that can equal a Jew. Condemned by the thinking
planted into his head to the effect that he can only carry political water for
the Judeo-Israeli establishment, Cotton reduced his own role in life to doing just
that. But how does it all work in real life?
We were given an example as to how that works in real life
when, on a talk show last Sunday, Tom Cotton gave a revealing response to a
pertinent question. He was asked what he thought Israel should do now in the
matter of the ongoing war between its military and Hamas. Without a moment’s
hesitation, the former American soldier who travelled far and wide to kill the people
that refused to obey America, responded by saying, in effect, that neither he
nor America are qualified to tell Israel what it can and cannot do with the
steady stream of weapons and cash it receives from America.
How did a relationship that is so disgusting at its core,
develop between a superpower that the world used to worship, and a rundown
entity that managed to make the world hate it once again? Well, we must answer
that question by first observing that what happened took place not by accident
but by design.
That entity adopted the name Israel, having stolen Palestine
from its indigenous Palestinian people, and populating it with losers who were
summoned to it from around the world by agents of the old and new colonial
powers. This was a time when those powers were scheming to perpetuate their
dominion over a world that proved to be rich in natural resources which they
desperately needed to feed the newly developing Industrial Revolution.
Believing that they committed the perfect crime against
humanity for which there will be no serious consequences to them, the colonial
powers ‘slept at the switch’ so to speak. What they did not realize was that Israel
was not the tool they believed they had in their hands, but that they were the
tools which the Jews had in their hands. Worse, the colonial powers discovered
that the Jews were working on a scheme for world dominance that made their own
scheme look like child play.
Of the many examples from which we can choose to demonstrate
the kind of tricks that the Jews have been pulling on mankind for centuries, we
choose one that is pertinent to the current situation. It is the Jewish
formulation of the expression: “Israel has the right to defend itself.” What is
absent in this expression, is the notion that self-defense is a universal
right. But because of the glaring absence, the expression sounds like it
asserts only Israel has the right to self-defense.
We can tell that such assertion was meant to be reflected by
the expression because the propagation of the latter was made to follow the
traditional Jewish method of stuffing in the mouths of others what they want
the elites and the public to recite as given, and without the slightest
deviation. This being the case, anyone who might complete the thought by saying
it as follows: “Israel has the right to defend itself, and so do the Palestinians,”
would be cancelled before they had the time to finish the sentence.
Two different things happen when devious expressions of that
kind land in the ears of elites, and those of the general public. The elites fall
in love with the truncated content of the expressions because they are given out
in the form of a bumper sticker, a form that used to amuse them while growing
up dreaming that someday, they too will join the political crowd and come up
with attractive bumper stickers of their own.
As to the general public, they juxtapose what is meant by
that expression with images of the Israel Terrorist Force (ITF) bombing Palestinian
families to smithereens in their own homes, and calling such gruesome acts
self-defense. And so, the ordinary people tell their elites they must end their
association with the Jewish entity that made of America the laughingstock of
the world.